C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [SG10] Access to source for SG-10 document?

From: Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 23:41:56 +0000
> a) FWIW, SG10 already "[hopes] that every paper will include its
> own recommendations concerning feature-test macro names" [N3745].
> Perhaps whenever Clark in future announces or reminds WG21 of
> upcoming mailing deadlines, he might also remind authors about
> this SG10 request.

I was kind of imagining that CWG and LWG would add "What about a
feature-test macro?" to the list of things they consider when reviewing a
new-feature proposal. Perhaps initially that question would be raised by a
member of SG10 that happened to be on hand. :-) Eventually, feature-testing
will hopefully become part of the committee's DNA.

> b) It seems to me that SG10 might in future routinely schedule a
> between-meetings teleconference to review the most recently
> approved WG21 motions for their possible impact on our document.
> At the following WG21 meeting, SG10 can then report on the
> existence of an updated version of SD-6.

You're right, I should have done this. But after Chicago, I was giddy with
success, and then my life became something of a whirlwind. By the time other
things settled down, the holidays had arrived. Sorry.

> c) I would fairly strongly prefer that changes to SD-6 occur only
> as a result of SG10 consensus, and that such approved changes be
> committed only by the SG10 chair or other SG10-designated
> individual. I would be very leery of allowing changes to any
> standing document by an arbitrary WG21 participant, no matter how
> well-motivated.

No argument from me.


Received on 2014-01-11 00:42:01